On 2/13/06, Attila Kinali <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sun, 12 Feb 2006 10:16:11 -0500 > Timothy Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > It's going to be openly published under GPL as soon as it's ready for > > review. After we sell some boards, we'll convert the license to LGPL. > > Please make this review as early as possible, even if the schematics > are still incomplete. The reason is simple: the further you get with > the schematics, the harder and more time consuming it will be to > fix anything. You do not even have to make a public review, just ask > a few to do it and tell them not to tell anybody about it until > you officialy release it.
We thought about this, then the schedule kept slipping. Slipping an announced schedule makes for worse PR than simply not announcing a schedule. Being labeled 'vaporware' is the death knell, because even once you've actually released, people don't find out and it's hard to shake. There are people who still think OGA was going to be released in June of 2005. <sigh> :) No PR and the consequences of that are much preferable to bad PR. > > Now many boards is something left open for debate. Pick something > > that will duely protect Traversal. > > Don't worry about this. Noone will kill you because you released > them too late under LGPL. > > (Actualy i dont see a reason why you ever want to releas it > under LGPL. Schematics arent something that is worth to hide.) I'm only doing this because I said I would, plus I have a slightly different view of 'freedom' from Stallman. I see the GPL as having restrictions that I, as an author (or representing authors), may not always want to impose on others. I see licensing as something to protect the author's investment in local reduction of entropy, you might say. If someone wants to publish closed-source, that's up to them. I know why it's better for the user to have open source or free software. It protects them from depending on a publisher who won't support them. My attitude is that if a developer wants to hide his source code, he's taking a risk that someone else WILL release their source code, and natural selection will select for the one that the users prefer. It isn't lofty ideals about freedom that is driving an increasing adoption of free software; it's the fact that free software is often superior and better supported. When was the last time you got technical support from Microsoft? _______________________________________________ Open-graphics mailing list [email protected] http://lists.duskglow.com/mailman/listinfo/open-graphics List service provided by Duskglow Consulting, LLC (www.duskglow.com)
